Wednesday, April 14, 2010
Criticism of the War on Terrorism against Terrorism
Critics argue it has been used to justify unilateral preemptive war, perpetual war, human rights abuses, and other violatiosn of international law. Opponents have also heavily criticised the Iraq War, and USA PATRIOT Act. Criticism of the War on Terrorism addresses the issues, morals, ethics, efficiency, economics, and other questions surrounding the War on Terrorism. Arguments are also made against the phrase itself, calling it a misnomer.
The notion of a “war” against “terrorism” has proven highly contentious, with critics charging that it has been exploited by participating governments to pursue long standing policy objectives, reduce civil liberties, and infringe upon human rights. Some argue that the term war is not appropriate in this context (as in War on Drugs), since they belive there is no tangible enemy, and that it is unlikely international terrorism can be brought to an end by means of war. Others note that “terrorism” is not an enemy, but a tactic; calling it a “war on terror”, obscures differences between conflicts. For example, anti-occupation insurgents and international jihadists. Some have also alleged that the tactics used are counterproductive to the goals. The
Decreasing international support
About : Raja CRN
Author description goes here. Author description goes here. Follow him on Twitter